Actually, the guy used several different accounts. The buddhist tried to block them all at first, but it got to a point where enough was enough.
Mike's commentary is a little irrelevant here; from what it looks like, the guy wasn't just merely doing a little "obnoxious venting", but rather doing death threats and flat out harassment. It's not a First amendment issue nor some weird "anti-stalker" law issue. The dude is obviously stalking the monk, and it's not something that should be defended.
The article itself does raise an extreme important question though: what is the appropriate response to this sort of puerile behavior? How is one supposed to cope with these type of people? Do you just block them as they come in, even though they can easily make a new account to harass you with? Or can you make a federal case out of it?
And if I'm not mistaken, the money will come out of the police officer's pockets, rather than the department's money. That's a key difference (one hurts the infringing policeman directly, and one hurts the taxpayers).
Wrong. A police officer is allowed to move the public away reasonably in order to do his job. If the public is literally up in his face, and continues to do so, the police would be allowed to charge that person with obstruction of justice.
What he cannot do is arrest an innocent bystander who is merely filming an incident at a safe distance.
There's no reason why filming should interfere with the job that the police have to do.
Err, unless I got it totally wrong, on console, DLC is applied to the account, not the console. I have an Xbox live account that contains all the stuff I bought from there, and I should (haven't tested this) be able to go to any other console and bring that stuff along to me.
Yeah, this definitely wasn't as bad as Mike made it out to be. Still though, I don't like how the police officer refused to acknowledge the law, and implied that he could've arrested the man for doing something well within the confines of the law.
However, unless he breaks open a new bottle each time he pours a cup, there's nothing ensuring that the bottle is perfectly fine. Plus, there's no refrigeration, so nothing that would ensure that the lemonade stayed at a safe temperature.
Sure, I know this is blind paranoia, and that the odds are overwhelmingly likely that he didn't do jack to it, but these are the reasons behind health codes, and it's kinda hard to be against something that's for the safety of the consumer for these reasons.
That's just semantics. Don't get hung up over the word "selling". There are some solid points in there, and ignoring those while only arguing over the word "selling" just lowers yourself in the matter.
I do like Gamestop as a concept, but I really don't like their stores.
Their employees get a little "too friendly" with you. Like, if they hear anything game-related, they feel like that they have to comment on it. A little privacy when I'm shopping might be nice? They do know their stuff though, so maybe it's a little attempt at a gamer trying to reach out to another gamer.
That wouldn't be all too bad, if they didn't use that to try to upsell EVERYTHING. They will try to get you preorder some game, and if you refuse, they have the gall to ask you "are you sure?" like 3-4 times, and then the same thing over with their pro power card. Please man. I just came in here to get a game. Not be marketed to.
They sorta already do; they provide one-time use codes (to provide access to major parts of gameplay, or the online portion of the game), depriving the used copy of the code. This effectively turns it into a license.
And this is only for console games. On PC, it effectively already is a license market, since digital distribution controls the lion's share of the PC game market, and everything there is a license rather than a sale.
It's especially funny when you look at the whole situation where Odio is Robin Hood. Now suddenly Odio's the valiant hero saving the day, robbing the rich and giving to the poor.
A huge middle finger at the cost of $12.5 billion as compared to $4.5 billion (split across six companies).
And since Google (to my knowledge) hasn't had a history of litigation, only defending themselves, I kinda think AppleSoft are just laughing it up right now.
Honestly though, assuming that the Canadian Political Party doesn't support or care about asbestos exports, I'm pretty sure that they don't care if the lawsuit brings more attention to her cause. And, if the CPP is actually against asbestos exports, then it's mostly a win-win situation: the CPP gets the logo removed and the lady gets more attention for her cause.
Re: It's an approach to fluorishing piracy, a reaction...
In the case of game servers, pirated game servers are usually running server software not developed by the game company. Instead, it's a reverse engineered version that attempts to mimic the original server. What you end up with is a version that's mostly there, but in many cases, lacks many of the features (like scripted dungeon encounters, or character class abilities, etc.) and will probably be a lot more buggy than the original.
So free may still be cheaper, but it's also nothing like the original.
Through their in-app purchasing system. At that point, they act as a publisher and credit-card system all in one. Otherwise, you force the user to go out of the app into some outside webstore where they'd have to get out their credit card and enter some other information.
If you've done or read any sort of studies on this, you'd know that getting users to do ANYTHING is hard enough. Making them do more stuff to do something like buying a product is next to impossible.
30% for a boost in customer willingness isn't all that bad.
And secondly, your argument is faulty. HTML always allowed vendors to bypass the store. Your narrow-minded thinking is just as reasonable as thinking that "piracy = bad", when as a reader of this site, you should know by HEART that piracy does not necessarily mean bad, just like HTML does not necessarily mean bad for Apple.
And just like Biff said, since Apple has been pushing for web apps from the start alongside native apps (iPhone 1st gen was only purely web apps, and you can create apps on your home screen that go straight to a webpage without the safari overlay), you can definitely be sure that Apple has understood the concept that HTML as a side partner to native apps can be a good thing as a whole for the iPhone ecosystem, and thus therefore good for Apple as a whole. Chasing after in-app revenues would be like chasing after pennies while losing the dollars.
Out of those 5 people, how many people actively use market apps?
How many of those people use non-market apps?
How many of those people have rooted their phone?
How many of those people have loaded a custom ROM?
How many of those people have touched a single line of code in the Android codebase?
The reason why I ask these things is because although these issues may be relevant to techies like you and me and your friends, the unwashed masses hardly know a thing. They only know one thing: iPhones are the sweetest thing out there. They don't even know what Android is.
On the post: Is It Stalking To Bombard Someone On Twitter With Offensive Messages?
Re:
Mike's commentary is a little irrelevant here; from what it looks like, the guy wasn't just merely doing a little "obnoxious venting", but rather doing death threats and flat out harassment. It's not a First amendment issue nor some weird "anti-stalker" law issue. The dude is obviously stalking the monk, and it's not something that should be defended.
The article itself does raise an extreme important question though: what is the appropriate response to this sort of puerile behavior? How is one supposed to cope with these type of people? Do you just block them as they come in, even though they can easily make a new account to harass you with? Or can you make a federal case out of it?
On the post: Gamestop Discovers The Streisand Effect; Gives OnLive Tons Of Free Publicity In Trying To Take Away Coupons
Re: Re:
He's not saying selling something used is fraud. He's saying that selling something not new as new is fraud. Which it is.
On the post: Appeals Court: Arresting Guy For Filming Cops Was A Clear Violation Of Both 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re:
On the post: Appeals Court: Arresting Guy For Filming Cops Was A Clear Violation Of Both 1st & 4th Amendments
Re:
What he cannot do is arrest an innocent bystander who is merely filming an incident at a safe distance.
There's no reason why filming should interfere with the job that the police have to do.
On the post: More Misplaced Hatred For The Used Games Market
Re: Re: Re: Re: Unpaid EA
On the post: Concord PD Hits For The Cycle: Lemonade Stand + Camera + Wiretap Law
Re: All in All...
On the post: Concord PD Hits For The Cycle: Lemonade Stand + Camera + Wiretap Law
Re: Re:
Sure, I know this is blind paranoia, and that the odds are overwhelmingly likely that he didn't do jack to it, but these are the reasons behind health codes, and it's kinda hard to be against something that's for the safety of the consumer for these reasons.
On the post: Concord PD Hits For The Cycle: Lemonade Stand + Camera + Wiretap Law
Re: Re:
On the post: Concord PD Hits For The Cycle: Lemonade Stand + Camera + Wiretap Law
Re: Re: Re:
Gas stations all packed in one street intersection.
On the post: More Misplaced Hatred For The Used Games Market
Re:
Their employees get a little "too friendly" with you. Like, if they hear anything game-related, they feel like that they have to comment on it. A little privacy when I'm shopping might be nice? They do know their stuff though, so maybe it's a little attempt at a gamer trying to reach out to another gamer.
That wouldn't be all too bad, if they didn't use that to try to upsell EVERYTHING. They will try to get you preorder some game, and if you refuse, they have the gall to ask you "are you sure?" like 3-4 times, and then the same thing over with their pro power card. Please man. I just came in here to get a game. Not be marketed to.
On the post: More Misplaced Hatred For The Used Games Market
Re: Re: Unpaid EA
And this is only for console games. On PC, it effectively already is a license market, since digital distribution controls the lion's share of the PC game market, and everything there is a license rather than a sale.
On the post: More Misplaced Hatred For The Used Games Market
Re:
On the post: 'Jonathan's Card' Raises Interesting Ethical Debate: Who Decides Which Uses Of A Shared Resource Are 'Right'?
Re: People and Irony
On the post: Google Spends $12.5 Billion To Buy Motorola Mobility... And Its Patents
Re:
http://gigaom.com/2011/08/15/guess-who-else-wanted-to-buy-motorola/
On the post: Google Spends $12.5 Billion To Buy Motorola Mobility... And Its Patents
Re: Re: Hardware Patents
And since Google (to my knowledge) hasn't had a history of litigation, only defending themselves, I kinda think AppleSoft are just laughing it up right now.
On the post: Canadian Political Party Threatens Widow For Using Its Logo In Ad Criticizing Canadian Government
On the post: Chinese Gaming Company Recognizes That 'Pirates' Are Underserved Customers
Re: It's an approach to fluorishing piracy, a reaction...
So free may still be cheaper, but it's also nothing like the original.
On the post: Amazon Routes Around Apple With HTML 5 Kindle App
Re: Re:
If you've done or read any sort of studies on this, you'd know that getting users to do ANYTHING is hard enough. Making them do more stuff to do something like buying a product is next to impossible.
30% for a boost in customer willingness isn't all that bad.
On the post: Amazon Routes Around Apple With HTML 5 Kindle App
Re: Re: More Cornell reasoning...
And secondly, your argument is faulty. HTML always allowed vendors to bypass the store. Your narrow-minded thinking is just as reasonable as thinking that "piracy = bad", when as a reader of this site, you should know by HEART that piracy does not necessarily mean bad, just like HTML does not necessarily mean bad for Apple.
And just like Biff said, since Apple has been pushing for web apps from the start alongside native apps (iPhone 1st gen was only purely web apps, and you can create apps on your home screen that go straight to a webpage without the safari overlay), you can definitely be sure that Apple has understood the concept that HTML as a side partner to native apps can be a good thing as a whole for the iPhone ecosystem, and thus therefore good for Apple as a whole. Chasing after in-app revenues would be like chasing after pennies while losing the dollars.
On the post: Apple Wins Europe-Wide Blockade Of Samsung Tablets; Guess Which Tablet Apple Is Scared Of Most?
Re: Re: Re: Re: If you can't compete, litegate
How many of those people use non-market apps?
How many of those people have rooted their phone?
How many of those people have loaded a custom ROM?
How many of those people have touched a single line of code in the Android codebase?
The reason why I ask these things is because although these issues may be relevant to techies like you and me and your friends, the unwashed masses hardly know a thing. They only know one thing: iPhones are the sweetest thing out there. They don't even know what Android is.
Next >>